Bridging the Belt And The Ballot: Pakistan In The 21st Century Great Power Rivalry

The rise of China as the world's leading economy not only poses a challenge to the United States' status as the foremost global economy, but also marks the triumph of China's political model over the US model of capitalist democracy.

To a large extent, this is a truism. However, it sheds light on the underlying causes of escalating tensions in the Pacific region. It underscores the growing significance of India for the US-led West and, retrospectively, highlights Pakistan's resurgence on the global stage as a crucial player due to its close ties with China. All of this carries profound implications for the region and hints at the potential realignment of the erstwhile world order in the future.

From Pakistan's perspective, the question arises: what will this realignment look like?

Pakistan plays a pivotal role in China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project, initiated in 2013 under the leadership of Chinese President Xi Jinping. The United States perceived this project as a means to expand Chinese economic and military influence through infrastructure development. A campaign was launched to caution participating countries, including Pakistan, that the loans provided under this program might entrap the recipient nations in a 'debt trap.'

President Xi, however, dispelled these notions in his speech at the BRI Conference held in October of this year.

Here is what he stated: “Viewing the development of others as a threat and economic independence as a risk will not enhance one’s own life or expedite one’s own development. (We will) refrain from engaging in ideological confrontation, geopolitical games, or bloc confrontation. (We) oppose unilateral sanctions, economic coercion, decoupling, and delinking.” He countered the criticism that the BRI aims to ensnare economically vulnerable countries in a debt trap.

The meetings between American and British envoys with Pakistani political leadership in November were likely intended to communicate these concerns. If this holds true, then the objective might be to postpone the elections until the end of 2024, providing a more ‘level playing field’ as advocated by various political forces.

In the program Game Changer on PTV, Dr. Hasnain Javed, a leading expert on Pakistan-China relations, pointed out that Pakistan can benefit from both China and the US by shifting its focus from geopolitics to geo-economics. The two leading economies of the world have shown a willingness to find ways to mitigate any advancement towards an active conflict. However, he also expressed concerns about Islamabad’s immediate ability to adapt to such a shift.

Nonetheless, formulating policies in this regard requires that Pakistan has a clear understanding of the world views of both China and the US. China operates a hybrid economy with predominantly state-controlled business enterprises, while the US economy is based on a free-market model with predominantly privately owned businesses. China’s political system is a one-party socialist republic – the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) – with a robust central government. In contrast, the United States is a federal republic, characterised by a multi-party system with the Democratic and Republican parties as the two major political entities. This fundamental difference brings Taiwan to the forefront as a contentious issue between the two nations.

Taiwan’s political system mirrors the US-style democratic system, and China claims Taiwan as a part of its territory. Thus, Taiwan holds strategic importance for the US for various reasons: it produces 70% of the world's semiconductors and lies on a route for 50% of the world’s traded goods. Consequently, complete control of Taiwan by China – if China were to annex the island – would mean Chinese dominance over this critical trade route and semiconductor production. It would also signify the replacement of the US-style democratic political system with China's one-party, centrally controlled rule.

Pakistan once again holds significance for the US owing to the developments taking place in both East and West.  It is imperative for the US to prevent Pakistan from becoming overly reliant on China for its economic and military requirements, thereby avoiding any potential inclination of Pakistan towards Russia. 

Differences have emerged between China and the US on many fronts. The Chinese have not condemned Hamas’s 7 October attacks on Israel. The Chinese have also maintained silence on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, since the war began in February 2022. They have remained engaged with India, despite tensions and skirmishes over Ladakh in 2020-21. And they have maintained close military and economic ties with Pakistan, while clearly staying aloof from Pakistan's internal politics, where the US is often accused of interfering. They have also watched quietly the political upheavals in Pakistan owing to both internal and external reasons, which have negatively affected the progress and effectiveness of the CPEC that is a part of BRI project.

Pakistan once again holds significance for the US owing to the developments taking place in both East and West.  It is imperative for the US to prevent Pakistan from becoming overly reliant on China for its economic and military requirements, thereby avoiding any potential inclination of Pakistan towards Russia. While a temporary ceasefire persists in the Gaza-Israel conflict, there is a chance to positively influence public opinion about the US in the Muslim world and Pakistan. This could counter Russian attempts to sway Muslim nations against the US. It is in the broader interest of the US to ensure heightened political stability in Pakistan and the continuation of the current foreign policy – a stance that would not displease China either for its CPEC projects – rather than introducing another element of uncertainty after the upcoming elections in February 2024.

The meetings between American and British envoys with Pakistani political leadership in November were likely intended to communicate these concerns. If this holds true, then the objective might be to postpone the elections until the end of 2024, providing a more ‘level playing field’ as advocated by various political forces. There is possibly a growing awareness among the internal and external forces that holding elections in February under current circumstances could potentially lead to further political turmoil, an outcome far from desirable given the prevailing geopolitical scenario.